Sunday, January 17, 2010

"If [computer models] can’t accurately and continuously replicate the results of real-world data, then they should be discarded.

Unfortunately, that is not what is happening.

We have gotten so addicted to the illusion that these programs are accurate — and some have become so agenda driven — that we are now adjusting or discarding real-world data that doesn’t agree with the model. This is insane."

"Programmer E.M. Smith’s analysis of NOAA’s GHCN found they systematically eliminated 75% of the world’s stations with a clear bias towards removing higher latitude, high altitude and rural locations, all of which had a tendency to be cooler. The thermometers in a sense marched towards the tropics, the sea and to airport tarmacs.
[...]
Most of the warming in the global data analyses is in higher latitude areas like Russia and Canada and in higher mountainous regions. These areas have seen significant dropout of stations. The warming comes from interpolations from regions further south, at lower elevations and more urbanized."

"Anyone who goes around and says that carbon dioxide is responsible for most of the warming of the 20th century hasn't look at the basic numbers."Patrick Michaels - Ph.D. Ecological Climatology, Professor of Environmental Sciences, U. of Virginia

“We have 25 or so years invested in the work. Why should I make the data available to you, when your aim is to try and find something wrong with it.”Phil Jones, Professor in the School of Environmental Sciences at University of East Anglia, to Steve McIntyre